commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Carman <jcar...@carmanconsulting.com>
Subject Re: [proxy2] Create new utils module...
Date Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:19:18 GMT
Yes of course.  It's just difficult to test things like invokers and what
not without a ProxyFactory implementation. These should be moved to a utils
module.  This would also keep the API clean and free from dependencies.
On Jun 12, 2012 2:01 PM, "Matt Benson" <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:42 PM, James Carman
> <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > When trying to test some of the utility classes (such as
> > DuckTypinginvoker), it would be useful to have a ProxyFactory to play
> > with.  However, in "core", we don't have access to one since they've
> > been broken out into their own modules (which reference core).  What
> > if we left "core" for just the "api" and moved all other classes into
> > a "utils" module?  The "utils" module could then import whatever
> > ProxyFactory implementation it wants as a test-scoped dependency.
> >
>
> No opposition to the basic principle, though we should also keep in
> mind the ServiceLoader-based DefaultProxyFactory implementation we
> added to the core, and which is accessible via ProxyUtils--as well the
> 'test' module that imports the other modules for the sake of testing
> the DefaultProxyFactory.
>
> Matt
>
> > James
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message